September 12, 2010
— Gabriel Malor Well, at least the anti-business 1099 mandate expected to hurt the economy more than it raises revenue. Republican Senators, along with several now-panicky Dems, are trying to add a repeal amendment to the small business bill under consideration this week.
Most Republicans want a full repeal. In a recent speech, the House Republican leader, Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, said the “1099 mandate” showed how the health care law could “wreak havoc on employers and entrepreneurs.”Republicans also see the new requirement as an example of the intrusive role they say the I.R.S. will play in enforcing the health care law, including its requirement for most Americans to carry insurance.
Senate Democratic leaders prefer a proposal by Senator Bill Nelson, Democrat of Florida, that would reduce the scope of the reporting requirement. Under Mr. NelsonÂ’s plan, businesses with 25 or fewer employees would be exempt from the new requirement, and the reporting threshold for larger businesses would be set at $5,000, rather than $600.
Meanwhile, the White House is nervously opposing either repeal effort because of fear it may create momentum to cancel other unpopular provisions in ObamaCare.
Oh, and this little gem was buried in the article:
The reporting requirement was in the health care overhaul bill unveiled in mid-November by the Senate Democratic leader, Harry Reid of Nevada. But it drew little attention at the time — it was one of more than 15 revenue-raising measures in the bill — and many lawmakers were apparently unaware of it when they voted for final passage of the legislation.

Yeah.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at
04:41 PM
| Comments (77)
Post contains 281 words, total size 2 kb.
Actually, that is an interesting question.
Did Obama really screw over his allies this badly, or are they saying this because there is no way they can defend it?
Either way, I'd suggest every Republican candidate incorporate their opponent's support for this measure in their campaign ads.
Posted by: 18-1 at September 12, 2010 04:46 PM (bgcml)
Posted by: The Audacity of the Bamboozlement!?!?! at September 12, 2010 04:47 PM (mnuOQ)
Posted by: The Audacity of the Bamboozlement!?!?! at September 12, 2010 04:49 PM (mnuOQ)
Posted by: steevy at September 12, 2010 04:49 PM (yYMI3)
Posted by: Rickshaw Jack at September 12, 2010 04:53 PM (ZtD0z)
That happens when you DON'T READ THE DAMN BILL!
Posted by: Tami at September 12, 2010 04:53 PM (VuLos)
Posted by: eman at September 12, 2010 04:53 PM (gF6M4)
Who else here has a job, or EVER had a job, where they could blow off stuff they are signing off on?
I never had one of those kinds of jobs.
Posted by: Jim in San Diego at September 12, 2010 04:54 PM (oIp16)
Ahhh, a new batch of servers for the farm!
Meh... screw cross referencing the packing list with what is actually on the pallet, I'll just sign for them.
Posted by: Rickshaw Jack at September 12, 2010 04:56 PM (ZtD0z)
Posted by: rawmuse at September 12, 2010 04:56 PM (+Tw/n)
Hey Dems, the big difference between 2010 and 1994 is this time, you've got me!
Hello? Hello? Testing. Is this thing on?
Posted by: B. Hussein Obama (D) Ex-Messiah, Now Pariah at September 12, 2010 04:57 PM (eCkV5)
Posted by: eman at September 12, 2010 04:58 PM (gF6M4)
Who else here has a job, or EVER had a job, where they could blow off stuff they are signing off on?
I never had one of those kinds of jobs.
Posted by: Jim in San Diego at September 12, 2010 08:54 PM (oIp16)
Yeah.. never happened to me ever. If I would have behaved like that.. my ass would have been fired.
Posted by: Timbo at September 12, 2010 04:58 PM (ph9vn)
Ahhh, a new batch of servers for the farm!
Meh... screw cross referencing the packing list with what is actually on the pallet, I'll just sign for them.
Posted by: Rickshaw Jack at September 12, 2010 08:56 PM (ZtD0z)
Plug 'em IN!
Turn 'em on!
...and then tune out.
Posted by: Jim in San Diego at September 12, 2010 04:58 PM (oIp16)
Posted by: steevy at September 12, 2010 04:59 PM (yYMI3)
Maybe a lesser count of treason only requiring flogging ... but still, treason.
(think CSPAN would air a flogging or two?)
Posted by: Garbonzo the Garrulous at September 12, 2010 05:00 PM (23kaI)
Posted by: steevy at September 12, 2010 05:01 PM (yYMI3)
Posted by: Soap MacTavish at September 12, 2010 05:01 PM (554T5)
Posted by: rawmuse at September 12, 2010 05:02 PM (+Tw/n)
Posted by: Garbonzo the Garrulous at September 12, 2010 09:00 PM (23kaI)
Brian Lampchop objects....tepidly as always.
Posted by: Delta Smelt at September 12, 2010 05:02 PM (A0VTZ)
I am all for repealing this but congress does this shit all the time. Pass a bill and say this is how it will be paid for, then they start repealing the how it will be paid for parts.
Meanwhile the deficit increases billions of dollars. If they are going to repeal it they should also repeal and equal amount of so called benefits to pay for the repeal.
fuckers.
Posted by: robtr at September 12, 2010 05:02 PM (fwSHf)
Posted by: mpurinTexas (kicking Mexico's ass since 1836) at September 12, 2010 05:04 PM (DC+Gj)
Our economy is still smoldering from the trainwreck which was subprime lending pushed and endorsed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, HUD and FHA. These government entities and their accomplices on Wallstreet blew up the entire world economy pushing junk loans on an unsuspecting public. Now, the democrats led by a community organizer want to take over 1/6th of our economy with the same kind of government top down planning, social engineering and the collateral damage of distortion of markets that result in trillions in waste, fraud and abuse. Throw Obamacare out in its entireity and start over with tort reform, insurance reform, and market driven solutions to our healthcare issues. We need to ride the next congress like a two dollar whore to make sure they start undoing the mess created by Obama, Reid and Pelosi...Anything less may be the final freakshow for this country...
Posted by: Scott at September 12, 2010 05:06 PM (sE08M)
Did you read the offending language, or know that this reporting requirement was in the bill? Or did you not?
If you did: the fuck?
If you didn't: the fuck?
EACH. ONE. ON. RECORD.
Posted by: tachyonshuggy at September 12, 2010 05:07 PM (BUlti)
The Dems and Obama better hope that it's repealed if they want to have any kind of political life left.
Bastards.
Posted by: SlaveDog at September 12, 2010 05:08 PM (foEpt)
Posted by: kansas at September 12, 2010 05:09 PM (1Vt0o)
With the sound of a gavel, a vote was called and the bill was passed. With the sound of a gavel, a vate can be called and the bill is DEAD.
KILL THE BILL
Oh and one other thing, IMPEACH that pretender to a non-existent throne ObowMao.
Posted by: Blacksmith8 at September 12, 2010 05:12 PM (DbVu1)
Posted by: Blacksmith8 at September 12, 2010 05:13 PM (DbVu1)
I've been thinking about this a lot, lately. Three years ago I had a fair amount of confidence in the financial aspects of my future. Now all bets are entirely off. All because a bunch of dimwitted Americans just had to have their hopey and changey. Thanks, fucktards.
Posted by: Soap MacTavish at September 12, 2010 05:14 PM (554T5)
Posted by: AE at September 12, 2010 05:15 PM (ezbsU)
First time I have ever heard the writing on this site described as "lucid'.
This spammer must be related to Ace since he doesn't read the blog either.
Posted by: MrCaniac at September 12, 2010 05:16 PM (aaULJ)
Posted by: rawmuse at September 12, 2010 05:18 PM (+Tw/n)
Well, I knew it was in the damn bill, because I read it. I didn't understand half of what was in it, because it was so convoluted, but I understood that part. It didn't have 50 different sections of other laws and reg. attached to that part. It was easily understood.
Effin' jerks.
Posted by: Steph at September 12, 2010 05:21 PM (nbzzk)
They say they didn't KNOW what was i it.
How can people respect this at all, they (representatives of the people)!voted in legislation that they absolutely had no real knowledge of.. or they voted it in Knowing it was so bad they had to state they Had no knowledge of later.
Posted by: willow at September 12, 2010 05:21 PM (/x2TR)
Posted by: Ronster at September 12, 2010 05:22 PM (q08oe)
(think CSPAN would air a flogging or two?)
Nope. Pay-per-view.
Hey, we got to reduce the deficit somehow...
Posted by: BackwardsBoy at September 12, 2010 05:27 PM (kFODZ)
Posted by: AmishDude at September 12, 2010 05:27 PM (3wPsb)
Posted by: Euell Theophilus Gibbons at September 12, 2010 05:31 PM (iaHP2)
Greta had the AG of SC (iirc) on the other night who said he was working on a suit against this POS bill. He made specific mention that the Dims omitted a key provision to insure it's passage. This provision didn't allow for the separate parts to be individually considered, something that most bills contain. Since this is missing from the DeathCare bill, if one part of it is struck down, the whole bill dies.
Sweet. Hope it works. We'll see...
Posted by: BackwardsBoy at September 12, 2010 05:33 PM (kFODZ)
Posted by: political correctness czar at September 12, 2010 05:34 PM (UPNlB)
Not an excuse. If they voted for it, throw them out of office at the earliest opportunity.
Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at September 12, 2010 05:45 PM (fxACH)
Posted by: crosspatch at September 12, 2010 05:51 PM (ZbLJZ)
Posted by: eman at September 12, 2010 05:54 PM (gF6M4)
will the Democrats claim they were lied to by Obama much like they claimed that Bush lied them into war? I would not hold it against them for this election cycle.
Posted by: My Democratic career is over at September 12, 2010 05:54 PM (JfhXO)
Everybody who voted for this bill should be made to go on record:
Did you read the offending language, or know that this reporting requirement was in the bill? Or did you not?
Absolutely. But I hope the GOP takes it one step further, and ties Obamacare not only to the individual Dems who voted for it, but to the Dem party itself. Over and over and over...Obamacare = Dems. Because a lot of the actual Dem critters who voted for Obamacare will be bounced out of office this Nov, and Obamacare needs to be an anchor around the neck of the Dem party for years if not decades to come.
Posted by: Mayday at September 12, 2010 05:58 PM (TRgli)
Posted by: The Audacity of the Bamboozlement!?!?! at September 12, 2010 06:06 PM (mnuOQ)
Posted by: Adriane at September 12, 2010 06:21 PM (+NfQM)
Doubtful. Severability provisions are generally redundant: the canons of statutory construction effectively make all bills severable. The only time "if it's invalid, the whole thing is invalid" would apply is if it had actually been enacted in a procedurally unconstitutional way, like, say, arguably, "deem-and-pass," which didn't happen. That's how many state statutes get tossed by their state supreme courts under the single-subject provisions of most (all?) state constitutions, but the federal constitution doesn't have one of those. Maybe it should, though one should consider that that WOULD give more still more power to the judiciary.
Posted by: Dave J. at September 12, 2010 06:26 PM (DCQ0q)
Probably dies in Committee. Harry and Nancy love this stuff -- more IRS intrusion into every aspect of your life, more control for them! Dems saw it, and loved it. Now they are feeling the heat. But they still won't repeal it. Too many see the ability to act (in very safe seats, like say Linda Sanchez's) as an influence peddler to intercede with the IRS as a legislator.
That's whole purpose of the 1099 requirement.
Posted by: whiskey at September 12, 2010 06:30 PM (L03mw)
The entire criminal enterprise of Big government is infected with the Moral Hazard: it's not their money, civil servants can't be fired for squandering it, and politicians have rigged the game to keep themselves in power and stamp out challengers.
I long for the day the media report, "It's been raining politicians today, from every upper-story window in Washington".
Posted by: effinayright at September 12, 2010 06:36 PM (jSs4d)
Wrong. It's a trade-off.
US Primacy and Dominance over a hand-out.
Who wouldn't buy that?
Posted by: Back to Basics at September 12, 2010 06:39 PM (whh16)
I'm surprised this aspect isn't pointed out more often.
"Yes, that's a lot of money and unreasonable, Mr. Constitutent. Tell you what: give me half that much, and I'll go to the IRS and get the bill canceled."
Regards,
Ric
Posted by: Ric Locke at September 12, 2010 06:47 PM (Nh8jT)
Yes, Obama's an "opponent".
BUT he cares--or alleges to care--about those who are suffering.
Get to the root of why people of this Country are suffering, and you probably have a place at the negotiating table again.
And WHAT is it that we can all agree today?
Posted by: Back to Basics at September 12, 2010 06:53 PM (whh16)
Posted by: Back to Basics at September 12, 2010 06:54 PM (whh16)
Consider the culture. Improving and bettering your life one step at a time.
We have more in common than we don't. We're AMERICANS. That's the message that works today--on both sides.
Posted by: Back to Basics at September 12, 2010 07:08 PM (whh16)
...It's not JUST the message.
It's the GOAL.
Posted by: Back to Basics at September 12, 2010 07:11 PM (whh16)
How appropriate, Gucci.
When was "lowering our standard of living" ever acceptable to ANYONE in THIS Country?
Culture. OURS.
Posted by: Back to Basics at September 12, 2010 07:24 PM (whh16)
CULTURE snobs?
What's wrong with OUR culture?
Posted by: Back to Basics at September 12, 2010 07:31 PM (whh16)
<p>Under the new provisions if you file a Schedule C (self-employed) or are a business, you must send a 1099 to every vendor or supplier to whom you pay more than $600 cumulatively in one tax year.</p>
<p>If you pay more than $600 total to Wal-Mart in one year, you must send Wal-Mart a 1099. If you give more than $600 total to BP for gas in one year, you must send BP a 1099.</p>
<p>The 1099 forms that you submit to the IRS must not be hand-written. They must be optically readable by machine. You must call the IRS and ask to have shipped to you the special machine-readable forms and thread them in your printer (PDF blanks not accepted). See IRS Pub 1220 (page 5) and the Form 1099 instructions (page 101). The IRS penalty for unacceptable 1099s is $50 per item.</p>
<p>Have fun!</p>
Posted by: Huusker at September 13, 2010 06:46 AM (t78tu)
Another thing -- think of other business transactions like, I don't know, buying a car. If you have a trade-in, then the dealer has to give you a 1099 and then you -- you, the not-business party! -- have to declare the trade-in value as income.
Same with hocking stuff at a pawnshop or, I think, selling stuff on ebay or amazon.
This is insanity.
Posted by: Ella at September 13, 2010 07:51 AM (ppQCY)
very informative post, thanks for sharing it with us
Posted by: Stockport computer Repairs at January 21, 2011 11:44 PM (kDMZU)
Posted by: Nike pas cher at January 24, 2011 10:32 PM (3PyRJ)
Posted by: polo ralph shirts at May 09, 2011 12:04 AM (fAeSq)
More discount windows 7 product key and office 2010 product key,100% activation
Posted by: lisa at May 24, 2011 07:19 PM (rpLpS)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2264 seconds, 205 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: Mark in Spokane at September 12, 2010 04:44 PM (pGnsI)